Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:01 AM 11/8/00 -0800, you wrote: >(Of course the most perfect set of connoisseur lenses ever made are the >Biogon-Planar-Sonnar 28-45-90 for the G cameras. Too bad the darn things >don't attach to better cameras.... ;-) > >- --Mike I'm surprised to hear you say this, Mike, as you've said on numerous occasions that blur is especially important to you in the evaluation of a lens, and that Zeiss lenses rarely have good bokeh. (I agree, by the way; sold my Contax SLR.) Are the G lenses better in this regard, or is it simply that their other virtues outweigh this deficiency? Myself, I have to say that nothing in my experience comes close to the Leica M line, pre-aspherical. I haven't tried all of the new Konica lenses, and they may well give the Leicas a run for their money (although the Hexar's hardly a "line" yet); and my limited experience of Canon LTMs suggests that they can perhaps hold their own with early Leica optics, but the M line seems uniformly superb. (This should win me at least a couple of friends on this list.) I also have no experience of the R lenses -- I must confess that I've never heard a reasonable defense of the R bodies, so I've never given them much thought. (This should lose me these new friends on the list.) cheers, DC